I am just 41 seconds in and I have to stop you right here. Contrary to popular belief there is only 1 type of Satanist, and that type is atheistic and practices the tenets found in Anton LaVey's The Satanic Bible. Any other type ie theistic, is nothing more than a Christian heretic.

I am now at 3:29 in and I have to stop you again. I have a problem with the three common traits of all Satanists. "1. They are non-conformists." Actually, they are conforming themselves to herd activity under the guise of "non-conformity." 2. "They are thinkers." Wrong again. They are pseudo-thinkers rebelling for rebellion's sake which does away with # 3. "They are individualists."

Actually I had one small problem with the video and is that while I consider your video to be acurately (in a very basic/introductory way for newcomers or curious) describing 3 types (Of many, actually, where even mix ups can happen) of LHPps not all in the LHP is called Satanism. Luciferians for instance are not Satanists, they are Luciferians.

I am just 41 seconds in and I have to stop you right here. Contrary to popular belief there is only 1 type of Satanist, and that type is atheistic and practices the tenets found in Anton LaVey's The Satanic Bible. Any other type ie theistic, is nothing more than a Christian heretic.

I am now at 3:29 in and I have to stop you again. I have a problem with the three common traits of all Satanists. "1. They are non-conformists." Actually, they are conforming themselves to herd activity under the guise of "non-conformity." 2. "They are thinkers." Wrong again. They are pseudo-thinkers rebelling for rebellion's sake which does away with # 3. "They are individualists."

Okay now I have to have a say. One, no one is going to say exactly what a Satanist really is. You can conform to LeVay and still be nothing but a conformist. This does not make you a Satanist. I respect LeVay but am I an atheistic LaVeyan Satanist? No. I am not. I am not up for any adjective. A Satanist is a Satanist is a Satanist. Period. For whatever reason. However, conforming to the belief system of others and playing the role of the Satanist also does not make you a Satanist.

I also have to point out something else.. the Satanist IS an individual. I walk my path by myself every day. I form my own beliefs about things as they come and go in my life. I do this, no one else and I am the one that I have to answer to. No one else. We may hold the same "umbrella" but we are singular. I don't see anyone attached to my hip. Unless I am mistaken or blind. Which I am neither.

There is more than black and white here and I am assuming that right now that is what your television is set on. Evolve.

I am just 41 seconds in and I have to stop you right here. Contrary to popular belief there is only 1 type of Satanist, and that type is atheistic and practices the tenets found in Anton LaVey's The Satanic Bible. Any other type ie theistic, is nothing more than a Christian heretic.

I am now at 3:29 in and I have to stop you again. I have a problem with the three common traits of all Satanists. "1. They are non-conformists." Actually, they are conforming themselves to herd activity under the guise of "non-conformity." 2. "They are thinkers." Wrong again. They are pseudo-thinkers rebelling for rebellion's sake which does away with # 3. "They are individualists."

This post fails on SO many levels.

Firstly, although Satanism and theism are not compatible, saying the only sorts that qualify as a Satanists are CoS types is rather absurd.

Secondly, if you think Satanism entails following along with how others do it, you have missed the boat completely.

Thirdly, if you think Satanism is about rebelling for rebellions sake, you have again, completely missed the boat. In fact, you aren't even on the right ocean.

You really should have thought about what you were posting here before you hit submit. You now look like a complete buffoon.

As far as the original video goes, as I have said in other places I have found it, it is quite simplistic and arbitrary. I certainly do not fall into any of those silly categories.

Okay now I have to have a say. One, no one is going to say exactly what a Satanist really is. You can conform to LeVay and still be nothing but a conformist. This does not make you a Satanist. I respect LeVay but am I an atheistic LaVeyan Satanist? No. I am not. I am not up for any adjective. A Satanist is a Satanist is a Satanist. Period. For whatever reason. However, conforming to the belief system of others and playing the role of the Satanist also does not make you a Satanist.

I also have to point out something else.. the Satanist IS an individual. I walk my path by myself every day. I form my own beliefs about things as they come and go in my life. I do this, no one else and I am the one that I have to answer to. No one else. We may hold the same "umbrella" but we are singular. I don't see anyone attached to my hip. Unless I am mistaken or blind. Which I am neither.

There is more than black and white here and I am assuming that right now that is what your television is set on. Evolve.

Ok, resonating with the philosophy that LaVey set forth and calling yourself the label he attached does not make you a conformist. There are many LaVeyan Satanists who do not agree with every single think the man said.

"No one is going to say exactly what a Satanist is"LaVey has doing exactly this in the Satanic Bible. I do not recognize any other group claiming to be Satanists as such because prior to LaVey, Satanism as a religion did not exist. So to me (I could give a shit what anyone else thinks) a Satanist is one who is compatible with the Satanic Bible. All otheres are irrelevant.

So it's just a matter of words and their meaning it seems? I myself tend to differenciate the names from the things they represent. Claiming to be a Satanist could mean a lot of things depending on who is making the claim and I don't believe any are nessesary wrong.

While LaVey may have created Satanism as a religion (gave it a name) what he describes as Satanic thinking and as a Satanist existed before him and before his Bible.

Yes, noone before him claimed to be a Satanist but many before him could have been easily sliped into that category he just named.

But if we are to agree with that then Satanists are not truly Atheist, LaVey and the CoS at the time of the SB writing were not precisely atheists, and I'm not making that up, you can read it in the SB for yourself, the denial of the christian point of view doesn't make someone Atheist for their definition of god and the world may be different from that of a christian but may also be true for themselves.

On another point, a theist Satanist is not nessesary a heretic Christian, for all we know their Satan is not the same Satan of the christian mythology, for all we know, their Satan is a forest leprechaun that speaks in rhyme-riddles and gives cookies, yet he is a very real entity (for them) and that makes them Theists.

In the end it doesn't matter, you are right, it's irrelevant, it's all a matter of interpretation, of names and words, right?

Ok, resonating with the philosophy that LaVey set forth and calling yourself the label he attached does not make you a conformist. There are many LaVeyan Satanists who do not agree with every single think the man said.

"No one is going to say exactly what a Satanist is"LaVey has doing exactly this in the Satanic Bible. I do not recognize any other group claiming to be Satanists as such because prior to LaVey, Satanism as a religion did not exist. So to me (I could give a shit what anyone else thinks) a Satanist is one who is compatible with the Satanic Bible. All otheres are irrelevant.

You have misunderstood what I have said in reference to conformance. In fact, you missed it completely. Let me re-explain what I was saying before more words are put into my mouth here.

What I ACTUALLY said was and I quote: "You can conform to LaVey and still be nothing but a conformist. This does not make you a Satanist." I did NOT say that if you do indeed follow completely the tenets of the Laveyan Satanist that you are in fact, a conformist. Get your foot out of your mouth, uncover your eyes.

You said that there are many of those that call themselves Laveyan Satanists but do not agree with everything that he said in this post but previously you had the nuts to tell someone else that the one true Satanism (hehe reminds me of Blackwood only in reverse in this case) was the Satanism that completely followed the Satanic Bible and what LaVey outlined himself. Again, throw me a bone here DUDE, and decide what you really are saying.

Again, I really want to stress that I do not disagree with the significance Lavey had on Satanism in rounding everyone up and laying out basic outlines. However, Satanism has evolved into much more than this and it is not the 60's anymore. Thoughts on Satanism have changed from what was outlined into so much more and, for those whom have chosen to be proactive with it, it has been very beneficial. Unfortunately, all this seems lost on you. Which is okay because push comes to shove I would rather have the proactive than the other side of the line.

Also, you state that Satanism was not a religion before LaVey. Satanism, in my mind at least, does not constitute as a religion to me period but to entertain you, that is a false statement. In fact, Satanism was considered to be anything heretical to the christian belief system before it was re-modified by LaVey.

Oh and by the way, perhaps you should start talking in specifics if you are going to attack certain groups. Surely, you are not a mind reader and neither is anyone else.

Edited by OrgasmicKarmatic (11/19/1003:46 PM)Edit Reason: Adding the third cent

However, Satanism has evolved into much more than this and it is not the 60's anymore. Thoughts on Satanism have changed from what was outlined into so much more and, for those whom have chosen to be proactive with it, it has been very beneficial.

How has the thought current changed so much since TSB was written? What specific changes do you see and what do you see as 'so much more'? Also, how are people who embraced foundational Satanic principles 40 years ago so much different than people who embrace foundational Satanic principles today?

Originally Posted By: OrgasmicKarmatic

Which is okay because push comes to shove I would rather have the proactive than the other side of the line.

Proactive? Do you mean with regard to the individual or with regard to Satanists en toto?

The video's attempt to do just that is somewhat ironic. "If you don't fit neatly into one of these three categories then you fail to be an individual." Hah!

I am no enemy of categorization or classification. My problem here is that his categories are narrow and arbitrary, and don't really serve any practical function as they don't describe anything representing reality.

We are defined by language after all, and I prefer clarity to obfuscation when it comes to definition.

What he provides is a caricature that borders on satire(albeit unintended on his part), in no way representative of how the substance behind the form is manifesting.

This pretty much sums it all up. There might be some people who can be so easily pinned down but they are the exception. Whoever made this video is guilty of creating a false trichotomy. Yes, I did just make that word up so don't anyone bother telling me it isn't actually a word.

How has the thought current changed so much since TSB was written? What specific changes do you see and what do you see as 'so much more'? Also, how are people who embraced foundational Satanic principles 40 years ago so much different than people who embrace foundational Satanic principles today?

I can actually answer this with quite ease. The world around us today has changed in significant ways. For example, the ability to be so open with everything. In the world today, you can find out anything about anyone just as long as you have the will to do so. The stepping up and out of the individual is glaringly more obvious now than they were back then. From most that I have read Satanism as we knew it then was more of a "us vs them/collective we" activity. While I will agree that there are still those that actively live in such a way, most are liable to agree that they follow an individualists path.

The so much more.. Satanism offers so much to the individual as it always has. That will never change but it has evolved. It has learned to adapt and manifest in a new age. Satanism is treated differently and while a main outline is the TSB, individuals are not necessarily finding it completely binding as to the end all and be all of "who or what is a Satanist". As for what I personally see, I see members out there being more proactive with their lives and surroundings more than ever. Maybe it's because I am actually looking and finding these things, these people. Unfortunately, good with the bad, there are just as many out there that do not quite fit the bill. Alas, there always will be those people.

I also see a switch from the herd to the focus on the individual. I feel this is an extremely different and important thing for Satanism as it is a perspective of self.

Originally Posted By: Fnord

Proactive? Do you mean with regard to the individual or with regard to Satanists en toto?

As much as I would like to see Satanists as a whole be proactive, not everyone is going to be. (Which leads me to question if these individuals are actually Satanists.. but who am I to say?) I am more referring to the individuals that ARE being proactive. There are a few of us.. we can spot each other out. I am certain that you are of no difference when it comes to spotting pro-activity.

Registered: 09/29/10
Posts: 259
Loc: The Commonwealth of Great Brit...

I have read the comments with interest.

One thing we can all agree on is that nobody seems to be able to agree about what Satanism is, or who is a Satanist. It is all subjective, and relative to the individual state of mind.

Like anything that is created by people, there will always be those who complain or criticise, but do they attempt to put forward their own work or creations? No.

The hardened Satanist, who through experience knows their spiritual path like the back of their hand, may disagree with some or all the video, however, the video offers a useful service by countering ideas amongst the great unwashed that Satanists are no child sacrificing nutjobs. For the noob new to Satanism, the video offers a taste of what is on offer, consider it like a child's first ABC book, then they may delve into any of the three suggested "types" further, then make their own choice of what Satanism means to them, and to what path they wish to follow.

Edited by mabon2010 (11/20/1004:13 AM)

_________________________
Monadic Luciferianism is a philosophy of life centered on self.

Sure, but I'd bet that you're very meticulous about what you would allow yourself be defined by. That's the only point I was making.

Originally Posted By: OrgasmicKarmatic

I am certain that you are of no difference when it comes to spotting pro-activity.

Perhaps, but maybe for different reasons. When I see a 'Satanist' take the reins in their own life and use their own personal power to achieve an individual goal then I see someone who is worthy of respect. When I see a "Satanist" who takes up Satanism as a cause and as a means to 'win friends and influence people' I see someone to avoid. A real Satanist being proactive will, like as not, be invisible to those who would look unless they choose to share.

As for the rest, and I mean no offense, you type a lot without laying down anything concrete. Yes, more people are aware of Satanism because the means of communication are now more sophisticated. This doesn't change the fact that those who find Satanism and embrace the foundational tenets thereof, are few and far between.

Finding the true individual within yourself, embracing doubt, and setting off on your own 'Grail Quest' (see Dr. Aquino) are not things that are much influenced by 40 years or so and perhaps some better technology. Just as it was 40 or 100 or 1000 years ago, we all have a ticking clock hanging over our heads and how we choose to use our allotted time is the defining factor.

The world has changed. The basic tenets of Satanism have not. YOU can change your world by applying Satanic thought to it.

This discussion does bring forth interesting and thought worthy ideas. The main problem being the very definition of a Satanist and whether it is about conforming to a religion/philosophy or not. LaVeyans in particular like to point out that they are non-conformists, individualist etc all the while they critique other self-professed Satanists to not follow, what they claim to be, the basic tenets of TSB.

The most common explanation is that a Satanist does not conform because he already is. He is born a Satanist and merely sees his own philosophy reflected in TSB. Therefore the person isn’t conforming, hes just letting someone else put a label on what he is. While I know this is not how all interpret the “born not made” creed it is way to common and quite frankly I think its wrong.

Dan dread is right that to many Satanists seem to think rebellion is a goal in and of itself. I saw it first hand a few months ago when I discussed with someone here that claimed rebellion in itself was essential. This of course leads to the problem that in the endless quest for questioning all things you never settle and build a foundation. Or you question all things except what you consider to be true. In the case of LaVeyans we may mention metaphysical theories or how they approach new science that disproves atomism (making this universe not foundationally materialistic – even though it will not be described as spiritual either of course).

Some say that "no one is going to say exactly what a Satanist is" and still that is what I see all over this thread. Some does take the approach of trying to tell us what a Satanist is not however. I don’t think theism or spirituality necessarily are incompatible with Satanism for example (although I am no theist myself) but Satanism does have a good eye toward science and what if science were to prove the existence of what may be called spiritual realm? Science always hold the door open to new data and knowledge (even though individual scientists may not) would Satanism do the same if one of the “core tenets” were proven wrong (like in the example I provided in the above paragraph)?

We have been discussing the “did Satanism exist before LaVey” earlier and I see the same comments. Again I would like to stress that Satanism did not originate with LaVey. Neither as a word or a philosophy. However his organization might have been the first, or one of the most early, that successfully put together a coherent philosophy based on Satan and managed to popularize the term. Individual Satanist did however exist before LaVey in the 1800’s and depending on word definition maybe even organized, if marginalized, groups. The groups many traditional Satanists point to seem to have been largely mythical though (like the Luciferians in the 1700’s).

I would say that Satanism is so broad that it is very hard to categorize at all. There is no original Satanism and there are no holy books. It is a little bit like defining what right wing politics are. You simply can’t nail it down – perhaps there are thing you can say that its not but never can you really say that this is the core for all right wing political sympathizers. Maybe its to harsh but in general that is how I feel in regards to the whole thing we call Satanism. It is like a mosaic which does create one big picture even though the parts may at times be very different in size and colour from the others.

I take this stance exactly. Someone may believe that they are the only power in the world and that is fine as long as they follow their goals and try to achieve them. Someone who is themself and doesn't follow the herd and does whatever he or she believes is right and lives the way they want to live even with ridicule is a truly strong being. So many people just want to fit in at any price that they will sacrafice their own beliefs to do so. I believe in strong will, courage, inner strength and love for the ones that love me and if the world don't like it they can kiss my ass! Satanism is being you! Your own god!

According to my shaman doctor I need to work on my karma. So.. something positive should be said about the video... hmmm What music was in the background? I quite liked the mellow bombastic tone.

Loosely read and followed the video. I am a fan of classification as long as it suits a certain purpose. If it is the way you think it is, fine and whatever. Just don't take it too seriously and narrow things too much down. Many shades of green etc.. or was it purple or grey?

I find it curious that your post and your signature are so at odds here. On the one hand, you support lateral thinking and going against the herd, while on the other you seem to think that your number of subscribers on youtube is testament to the veracity of your opinions.

While I certainly appreciate your opinions, not leastly for the candour you show in displaying them, I find that you are at odds with yourself, and there's a worrying tendency towards ad hominem arguments. You discredit the opponent, the opponent's sources and the opponent's right to express him/herself, while often leaving the arguments themselves hanging.

Let us focus on the matter at hand when debating Satanism, and in this case, your so-called 'postmodern' Satanism. An interesting proposition, to be sure, but hardly one worth attacking other people over.

In short: no one cares how many subscribers you have. No one cares how well you believe you have discredited your opposition. Stick to the matter at hand. You seem to have a good grasp on your own opinions. Display some nobility.

_________________________
"I'd rather be right than consistent" - Winston Churchill

I find it curious that your post and your signature are so at odds here. On the one hand, you support lateral thinking and going against the herd, while on the other you seem to think that your number of subscribers on youtube is testament to the veracity of your opinions.

While I certainly appreciate your opinions, not leastly for the candour you show in displaying them, I find that you are at odds with yourself, and there's a worrying tendency towards ad hominem arguments. You discredit the opponent, the opponent's sources and the opponent's right to express him/herself, while often leaving the arguments themselves hanging.

Let us focus on the matter at hand when debating Satanism, and in this case, your so-called 'postmodern' Satanism. An interesting proposition, to be sure, but hardly one worth attacking other people over.

In short: no one cares how many subscribers you have. No one cares how well you believe you have discredited your opposition. Stick to the matter at hand. You seem to have a good grasp on your own opinions. Display some nobility.

Wow! An entire reply devoted to my signature of all things. Should I reply with something directed at your avatar? I mean, it's ghey as all balls, but why bother?

I've got a better idea, why not deal with all TWO lines of my reply vis a vis the quoted poster? Does that sound like something you can manage?

Even Dr. LaVey recognized and appreciated that there were a growing number of Satanic options as far back in print as 1975, when he wrote in his The Cloven Hoof article, UTOPIA, UNITY AND OTHER PLEASANT DIVERSIONS:

"The Church of Satan is a pivotal point around which much revolves. I respect a Satanist who can recognize a natrual need for a pivotal point yet maintain individuality; move in varied circles, influence those without, infiltrate, and when possible, emerge with flying colors; and eschew intermural rivalries.

Unfortunately, that is a big order to fill, even among Satanists. Therefore, group activity which leads to cliquishness which leads to factionalism is bound to occur. If there is any merit that evolves from factionalism, it is the separation and isolation process it provides. Factionalists are usually so preoccupied with their own importance and dissatisfaction that they honk their horns loudly, and invariably at each other. They keep things lively, they act flashy, and the customers (the public) are entertained. They provide an effective contrast to the aloof and self-sufficiency of supportive and constructive Satanists, who inhabit the Pleasure Domes I anticipated in my earliest C/S writings."

And indeed, options have increased with the expansion of the internet and the ability for even the most housebound Satanist to find an outlet for his or her interpretation of Satanism. The adage the "The proof is in the pudding" applies, one would think, in seeing what longevity the options that have presented can have. To date, the track record isn't good, but that's not to say that an idea can't take hold, based on its own merit, and thrive. One would hope that it can do so honestly and avoid the pitfalls that most find unavoidable.

Having 40 years of success with LaVey's brand of Satanism, it would be highly unlikely for me to find an idea that would alter my course, and I would be one of the first to tell people that today's Church of Satan "isn't your father's Oldsmobile." So it's good to have those choices, I think, so long as they can stand on their own without claiming LaVey simply to cash in on his legacy. He told me once that, "In this world of billions, it's not news if you present an idea and gain followers. The real news would be if you presented an idea and NOBODY followed."

you seem to think that your number of subscribers on youtube is testament to the veracity of your opinions.

Actually, I had to correct this, sorry for the back-to-back.

My sig should be understood as referring to Manifestation, an integral part of Satanism as I understand it. It's no veiled appeal to authority (as I have none here on 600), but rather a way of asking, "what have YOU done to manifest the Current?"

If I may be so bold, for what? If you want to kill JK on 600, this ain't the way to do it, dude. Mods shouldn't get butthurt after a single rejoinder. But do whatever you will, and I'll keep handling my business. Let's call it a game of chicken . . .

Dancing around the subject, arguments of intimidation, arguments of authority... I thought I made this clear in my first post, but I'm more than happy to keep it simple for you, since your response was so intransigent.

There's no call to act like a spoiled child about this. My warning stands, and if you keep insulting other members here, including myself, you are out. The choice is yours, and it's no hair off my balls.

_________________________
"I'd rather be right than consistent" - Winston Churchill

Dancing around the subject, arguments of intimidation, arguments of authority... I thought I made this clear in my first post, but I'm more than happy to keep it simple for you, since your response was so intransigent.

I dare you to show me any of the above on my part. Direct JK quotes would be super-cool.

Here's what I think, call it a hunch. You want to ban me yesterday. You're just itching for a reason. Something you can sell to the higher-ups as legit. And it just tickles your pickle that you can encounter JK in a non-neutral area where you can hurl asymmetrical threats. It honestly bothers you that the words in my signature ring true. I ask "what have you done," and your reply is, "I'm getting ready to boot you from 600". Very well then. That can be the thing you've done. That can be your Manifestation. Because I'll be damned if I'm going to sit here (or anywhere) and take threats from some dude who won't even put his face behind what he says. And I'll say this, you wouldn't be MAN enough to confront me in ANY arena where you didn't have absolute power. So go ahead, prove how big and bad you are. But I'll never stop being who I am, and FUCK your attempted intimidation. BTW, you'd be wise to delete this entire thread after you ban me, we wouldn't want anyone seeing how you totally did shit wrong.

I have zero desire to ban you. However, I have a lot of desire to see you behave politely, and tackle people by countering their arguments rather than going after them as people. Using invective and abuse, plus referring to yourself in the third person do not make you right.

Please, let us return to dealing with the matter at hand.

_________________________
"I'd rather be right than consistent" - Winston Churchill

Maybe you should start seeing things in another perspective. Sure you got a lot of subscribers on youtube but let's be serious; they're kids. You're the king of kids. What are most? In their 20ies, if, just finished sucking mommy's tit and still needing to apply their Satanism in practice. Maybe ten of all those subscribers will ever manage; the rest will phase out.

Youtube is a venue for the casually interested. This is a venue for the serious traveller of the LHP. I don't think they are comparable. On all of youtube, I can count on one hand anyone that has anything new or interesting to say about Satanism.

Registered: 09/29/10
Posts: 259
Loc: The Commonwealth of Great Brit...

Just as a note of interest, I managed to finally get an idea of what Post Modern Satanism was about via YouTube, and it is a new type of Satanism. I note:

1. Post Modern is about walking an individual rather than group path.

2. Post Modern is about expressing Satanism in the form of action, painting... music... writing books.

It is a good form of Satanism. I can see Post Modern will catch on and will kill off Laveyan Satanism.

SIN is another expression of Post Modern, people doing something.

I am sure I have missed a lot of what Post Modern means ... but anyone who walks the individual path and takes Satanism forward as action would probably be correct if they said they were a Post Modern Satanist.

The guy with some attitude here probably, if he could use simpler words in his books would be another talked about individual for Post Modern Satanism in the same manner as Lavey is for Laveyan Satanism.

_________________________
Monadic Luciferianism is a philosophy of life centered on self.

Contrary to popular belief there is only 1 type of Satanist, and that type is atheistic and practices the tenets found in Anton LaVey's The Satanic Bible.

I'm glad that was settled definitively once and for all. I'm so sick and tired of these goobers who think they have anything new to offer Satanism. How dare anyone think outside the box.

JK

Offering something *TO* Satanism is applauded and encouraged. Redefining and/or undermining the basic tenets is discouraged. Satanism does have boundaries and can be thought of as a box. Unlike most things though, it's a really, really big box (so those who manifest have room to do so).

I'm not laying any of that at your feet as yet, though. I'm still reading your work.

Satanism has always been an individual path. The failure to recognize this shows a failure to understand Satanism.

Quote:

2. Post Modern is about expressing Satanism in the form of action, painting... music... writing books.

Wouldn't TSB be considered a written expression of Satanism? Expressing an idea through artistic means is not a new concept and certainly not one that was discovered when someone wrote a book called Postmodern Satanism.

Quote:

It is a good form of Satanism. I can see Post Modern will catch on and will kill off Laveyan Satanism.

A "good form" of anything is all based on subjective opinion. And the death of "LaVeyan Satanism" will come from within, not from without. Even then I don't think it will ever just completely disappear. There may come a time when it is not as popular as it once was but I don't see it going anywhere.

Quote:

SIN is another expression of Post Modern, people doing something.

They are doing exactly what is being done here: talking. Of course, I get the distinct impression that the people here also participate in a lot of actual "doing". Talk is cheap.

I don't think low of youtube as a medium; it can be as valuable to express something as the written word but when you start reading the comments, overall that is, it seems it is heavily populated by morons. It's the same everywhere on those populistic sites. Check out facebook or other pages and see how all those satanic groups are populated by kids that can hardly spell Satanism, let alone live it. Even here we got 4000 users and if there are 50 satanists amongst them (I'm optimistic), we can call ourselves lucky.

They all talk the talk and adore anyone that presents them an option to feel like a wolf but in reality most are scared puppies. They are average people living average lives and most their Satanism only presents itself when they get in their chair and try to convince others, and maybe themselves, that they are the real deal. But when it comes to putting themselves to the test, crossing the lines out there, breaking their own taboos and trying to become what they are, most utterly fail and never get beyond that mediocre persona they are destined to be.

That's the majority of our and other's user-base; I surely wouldn't put it on a pedestal.

Registered: 09/29/10
Posts: 259
Loc: The Commonwealth of Great Brit...

@ Diavolo.Agreed on all points.A YouTube video by a recent Post Modern Satanist made an observation that Satanism has a load of predators, but where the predators run so do their fleas. The people you describe are the fleas.

@ Dan_Dread. I am a Luciferian. I was never a goat man.Birds can all be described as birds, but if you look closely they are different, which is why those birds have other names like eagle, vulture or swan. Satanists can all be described as Satanists, but if you look closely...

_________________________
Monadic Luciferianism is a philosophy of life centered on self.

Maybe you should start seeing things in another perspective. Sure you got a lot of subscribers on youtube but let's be serious; they're kids. You're the king of kids. What are most? In their 20ies, if, just finished sucking mommy's tit and still needing to apply their Satanism in practice. Maybe ten of all those subscribers will ever manage; the rest will phase out.

I wouldn't take them or it too serious.

D.

I don't necessarily disagree with you here. But everything you've stated can be applied to TSB with equal force. Think about it . . .

@ Diavolo.Agreed on all points.A YouTube video by a recent Post Modern Satanist made an observation that Satanism has a load of predators, but where the predators run so do their fleas. The people you describe are the fleas.

I wonder why you linked nothing. I mean, after all, you referred to a video. Look, dude, I know exactly what video you were referring to here, but the point is, you have painted doubly wrong with your brush. I'll be charitable and call you a liar.

YouTube, and the importance thereof, are a matter of perspective and motivation.

I'll attempt to carve out my take on YouTube subs etc. and their importance herein.

First, let's establish a baseline. For the sake of argument, let's say that:

Subscriber, Follower, etc. = Individuals who value your work and use the information provided.

At this point in time, I have several 'subscribers' who use and value my work. At present, (like right now) I have the largest architectural firm in the country and the largest electronics company (two of my subscribers) arguing over who gets the next block of my time (and arguing means throwing me cash offers). What they don't know is that I can solve both of their problems, at the same time, and still post on the 600Club with the time left over. A few other of my 'subscribers' own $35 million per year businesses. I can call them at any time (and do) and say "hey asshole, let's go to lunch." But, that's me.

Jake here, who has shared some of his stuff publicly, has used his considerable acumen to pull his assets together in such a way that OTHER people (his subscribers) are paying his bills and building his wealth. THAT is a real motherfucker in my book and I'm glad to be acquainted with him (cause I might learn something if I pay attention).

One of our esteemed moderators here, Nemesis, same deal. She's engaged in empire building of her own kind.

We have many examples of exceptional people here (some publicly notable) who are walking the walk with deliberation, determination, guts and Satanic savvy.

The commonality between all is that none have YouTube subscribers of any quantity. ALL have subscribers though, with cash money.

So what is the value of a subscriber with regard to youtube, specifically?

This is not meant, in any way, to be a slight to Jason King. I'm using Jason King because he threw down the gauntlet in his signature and in asking 'what are YOU doing to manifest the current?'

In looking only at the facts that are readily available, I can surmise a few things.

1). Postmodern Satanism is probably not a commercial success. 2). Jason King, with regard to Satanism, is also probably not a commercial success (though he may otherwise be).

I make this assumption because the book is now available for free to interested users. Why? Is it because Jason King has sold so many copies that he's now rolling in dough and has had a 'Scrooge' turn of heart? I don't see Jason King as a person who is known for humanitarian acts. I think he wrote the book to make money, and to become known as a force in Satanism. If I'm correct, and, if the book didn't sell well, he would cut his losses, offer the book for free, and hope to garner a wider readership. It's what I would do if I were similarly motivated. I think in the case of youtube, subscribers are <> (NOT EQUAL) to cash.

The fact of the matter though, is that I'm not similarly motivated. My motivation is to continue pleasing my own kind of subscribers who have no idea that I cultivate the black flame. In this way, I force my competitors to become better to try to take what is mine. They will not, because I'm better, and I will always strive to be better, and they will always try to ape what I do (and will remain second best). If they fool someone, I'll get paid to clean up the mess. No problem.

So, to circle back around.

If YouTube pulled the plug today, my subscribers would still be giving me cash. So will Jake's, so will Nem's, so will a bunch of other walking-the-walk motherfuckers who frequent these hallways. It's how we roll at 600.

Bottom line, *I* don't have any questions.

That being said, I appreciate and admire anyone who has the guts to put their work out and to try to better themselves and their calling. Because Jason King offers his work for free does not devalue it in my estimation. It just means that he didn't market it to the right people. I'm 60% or so through his book and resonate with much of it. It is an authentic work (aka a Satanist getting down to brass tacks with his/her perspectives) whether or not I agree with every little detail.

Registered: 09/29/10
Posts: 259
Loc: The Commonwealth of Great Brit...

Originally Posted By: Jason King

Originally Posted By: mabon2010

@ Diavolo.Agreed on all points.A YouTube video by a recent Post Modern Satanist made an observation that Satanism has a load of predators, but where the predators run so do their fleas. The people you describe are the fleas.

I wonder why you linked nothing. I mean, after all, you referred to a video. Look, dude, I know exactly what video you were referring to here, but the point is, you have painted doubly wrong with your brush. I'll be charitable and call you a liar.

MyAss BustsOrange Nuggets

I SAY:"A YouTube video by a recent Post Modern Satanist made an observation that Satanism has a load of predators, but where the predators run so do their fleas. The people you describe are the fleas."

In looking only at the facts that are readily available, I can surmise a few things.

1). Postmodern Satanism is probably not a commercial success.2). Jason King, with regard to Satanism, is also probably not a commercial success (though he may otherwise be).

I make this assumption because the book is now available for free to interested users. Why? Is it because Jason King has sold so many copies that he's now rolling in dough and has had a 'Scrooge' turn of heart? I don't see Jason King as a person who is known for humanitarian acts. I think he wrote the book to make money, and to become known as a force in Satanism. If I'm correct, and, if the book didn't sell well, he would cut his losses, offer the book for free, and hope to garner a wider readership. It's what I would do if I were similarly motivated. I think in the case of youtube, subscribers are <> (NOT EQUAL) to cash.

You are correct in just about everything you've said, except that I never envisioned Postmodern Satanism as a means of making any serious amount of money. The intended audience is just too small. Even if every Satanist on the planet bought it, I might have enough to live on for a year. I'm reminded of the Black House incident here. Not a single Satanist of "worth" stepped up to the plate.

The intention is to keep the ball of Satanism rolling in the zeitgeist, to touch somebody who will touch somebody, etc. To shift the dialogue. I've often joked that I could've made more money penning a biography of Brittney Spears.

Now don't get me wrong, I make money, but I don't see being creative within the Satanic philosophy as a viable means to augment this by any substantial amount. Applying the tools? Sure. But being a visionary? They're not ready yet.

I'm reminded of the Black House incident here. Not a single Satanist of "worth" stepped up to the plate.JK

Well, as someone who spent a considerable amount of time IN the Black House, and a Satanist who could probably have raised the $250K to buy back the Black House, had I desperately needed to, let me say this.

Wishing and wanting that it be so should NEVER come at the expense of common sense and reality. The truth, sad as it may be, is that by the time the "Black House" incident occurred. there was little of the Black House that could be saved from an economically viable standpoint. The deterioration of the house's structure and serviceability would have required almost a total rebuild to bring it into code standards, which could easily have dwarfed the purchase price.

When I served there, the heating system was BAD. Cosmetically, there were small cracks in the walls, but deeper damage had been done from over a century of quakes and, quite frankly, lack of preventative maintenance to the structure in general. The plumbing was equally bad and antiquated. Floors were in marginal condition and in some places, there was a detectible sagging when one walked. Fast forward 10-15 years later with NONE of the problems addressed. It was definitely worse.

Granted, some of the deterioration could have been caused by a well meaning, nostalgic and sentimental feeling that "This is the Black House," our HOME. We have to keep it as it's alway been because it's history. Well... our most treasured national buildings receive care to preserve them for the future. It's not just for nostalgia's sake and the need to preserve history. It's fiscally responsible to do so.

I'm a die hard Satanist and have laid it on the line for the cause, but there are reasons that "Satanists of worth" got that way, We (generally speaking) knew when to take opportunities that made sense and when to walk away, even when we really, really wanted to invest in special projects, even though we KNEW it would be a money pit. So we did due diligence, found the cons outweighed the pros and made sensible decisions based on the information at hand.

Dr. LaVey was not only my mentor, but a friend, and I really, really felt sorry for the condition of the Black House. But responsibility lies where responsibility lies and it wasn't with me or others who got where they were by the sweat of their brow, as much as we might have fantasized about riding in on that black stallion and saving the day.

I'm a die hard Satanist and have laid it on the line for the cause, but there are reasons that "Satanists of worth" got that way, We (generally speaking) knew when to take opportunities that made sense and when to walk away, even when we really, really wanted to invest in special projects, even though we KNEW it would be a money pit. So we did due diligence, found the cons outweighed the pros and made sensible decisions based on the information at hand.

Dr. LaVey was not only my mentor, but a friend, and I really, really felt sorry for the condition of the Black House. But responsibility lies where responsibility lies and it wasn't with me or others who got where they were by the sweat of their brow, as much as we might have fantasized about riding in on that black stallion and saving the day.

Your post was heartfelt and not received without a degree of introspection. Why the latter? Because I have to ask myself what I would've done in the same circumstance. I get what you mean regarding responsibility and letting the dead bury their dead. However, I'm somewhat reluctantly forced to ask, "have you no vision?" And I do mean that with all level of respect. I ask you, Jake, besides making money and posting to internet fora, what do you envision Satanism as being? And what are you doing to make this a reality?

Having been a Satanist since before you were born, I've spent my life working for Satanism, and not on the internet.

I spent 20 years in the military as an actitve Satanist, working for acceptance as a Satanist in the military and, after over 15 years of presenting my case while displaying professionalism as a military member, I was eventually recognized officially as a member of the Church of Satan and was the first man to receive his official dog tags with the religious denomination of Church of Satan.

That's no easy feat in an organization that's dedicated to "God Country and Apple Pie," especially as an enlisted man. I had to be able to stand and deliver, explaining the Church of Satan to everything up to and including an Undersecretary of the Air Force, Chaplains by the dozens. People who could make my life very, very miserable, had I been unable to suitably represent myself and the Church of Satan.

During this same period, I organized, operated and fronted The Melek Taus Chapel in California, where I was in the public eye frequently through newpaper articles about our group and our activities. We were openly Satanist in a time before people were conditioned to the trappings of Satanism, so our baptism of the newborn child of two of our members was covered, as were our open denunciations of cemetery vandalization by people using "satanic symbols"

It was from here that I was selected by Anton LaVey to work directly with him as the Administrator for the Church of Satan in San Francisco, in which capacity, I wrote for The Cloven Hoof as a member of the Church of Satan staff, interacted with those who wanted information, etc. Internet??? Still years away from practical availability.

I brought in the 1st computers into the Black House in 1984, and set up The Cloven Hoof and the Church's filing systems, using Macintosh computers... they still use them today. You name it, and I've done it within the structure of The Church of Satan and was at the Black House until I was reassigned to Germany and had to leave.

After retiring from the military, I began working for a Fortune 500 company, again, as an openly practicing Satanist, and moved up within the corporate structure as a specialist in BRAC (Base Relocations and Closures) accounting and finance, retiring at age 52.

I've spent the rest of my time pretty much speaking truth to agenda when people's fantasies about what Satanism was and is leads them to post some fairly outlandish things here on the web. I'm now retired and spend my time doing what I want to do for a change. Still openly Satanist and still loyal to Dr. LaVey's vision.

What I envision Satanism as being is at presently co-opted by a current leadership that has lost its way, and an ever burgeoning crop of internet wonders, few of whom survive. And yes, I have vision because of people like the owner of this board, XEAR, who remains active in Satanism, and others as well who might, from time to time seek my advice, for what it's worth.

So now... how about you? We know you can afford a camera and can upload to the internet, but what else? A self - published book? OK... I'm reading it and it has it's points. But what are you REALLY? Where are you putting your ass on the line for Satanism... what jeopardy do you face to advance your visions? Not trying to be insulting or critical, but you come to us and expect us to just accept. By what authority or principle, other than being on the internet making videos?

Those here have seen me for years... you've been here what, a week? Let people get to know you before you jump to conclusions.

With all due respect, Jake, and please understand that I respect what you have done for Satanists, specifically with regard to its current acceptance by the military as valid "religion", I have a question:

Isn't it true that martyrs have no place in Satanism? And wouldn't your "campaigning for Satanic acceptance" be considered a form of that? Even though you weren't burned at the stake for it you certainly took that risk.

Again, please understand that I am merely playing devil's advocate and in no way mean any disrespect.

Martyrdom would be considered wrong if it was done for a purely altruistic purpose. In fighting for my rights, I did it for ME. I wanted my rights as a Satanist, and while there were other Satanists in the military at that time, I had no desire to fall on my sword for them, even if as a byproduct of my personal activism it also brought them a degree of acceptance.

Registered: 09/29/10
Posts: 259
Loc: The Commonwealth of Great Brit...

Originally Posted By: 6Satan6Archist6

Isn't it true that martyrs have no place in Satanism? And wouldn't your "campaigning for Satanic acceptance" be considered a form of that? Even though you weren't burned at the stake for it you certainly took that risk.

Is it really martyrdom? To be a martyr, one has to play the victim role, where the one doing the presecution is the stronger party. Firstly, I see no one being persecuted. Secondly, I see no individual playing victim. Thirdly, I see Jake being in the empowered strong role, using his talents to influence change.

I suggest a champion or standard bearer role for Jake in this matter.

Edited by mabon2010 (12/21/1004:45 PM)

_________________________
Monadic Luciferianism is a philosophy of life centered on self.

"Acceptance" is a dirty word to me. It implies that there is some more powerful group or individual in whose bosom I should aspire to be wrapped. There isn't. I have no more respect for the legal processes of my country than their ability to ensure I hold the ace if something kicks off. I don't want "acceptance" as a transgender person or a non-Christian. What I have worked for (and continue to) is a legal framework that protects my self-interest and, thereby that of others in a similar situation. Banner-waving and coffee klatsching with the majority has no place on the Left Hand Path. (IMO)

LOL! Damn, Felix! I thought you and I might get together and so some of that fancy flag waving they do in the drum and bugle corps!

But I understand what you mean. When it comes to one's rights, you might well fall under the aegis of one group or another of like interest, and your efforts might assist them and theirs might assist you, but in the end, one works for one's own self preservation. Anything beyond that is gravy.

Jake: You make a valid point by bringing up the concept of an altruistic purpose vs a self-serving one that, as you mentioned, a byproduct of is beneficial to others as well. Admittedly, I am a little embarrassed that I didn't consider that distinction myself.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Mabon:

Quote:

Is it really martyrdom? To be a martyr, one has to play the victim role, where the one doing the presecution is the stronger party.

Wrong. A martyr is one who dies, or at the very least suffers, for their beliefs. Being a martyr has nothing to do with playing the role of the victim. Consider extremist Muslims who willingly martyr themselves for Allah. They don't view themselves as victims at all. If anything they are predators in a sense; usually martyring themselves while taking out a bunch of other people with them.

And even those who were martyred by the hands of others don't have to play the victim. Save for being the actual victim of their martyrdom whether it be by death or whatever. Keep in mind that there is a big difference between merely playing the victim and being the victim. You can die or suffer (literally or figuratively) for your beliefs and even if this comes at the hands of another you do not have to willingly succumb.

Further more, "the one doing the persecution", do not have to be the stronger party. Granted, "the ones doing the persecution" generally are the stronger party there is nothing that says "it has to be this way".

Quote:

Firstly, I see no one being persecuted.

Neither do I. And I never said anyone was being persecuted.

Quote:

Secondly, I see no individual playing victim.

Neither do I. And again; one doesn't have to "play the victim" to be a martyr

Quote:

Thirdly, I see Jake being in the empowered strong role, using his talents to influence change.

I never said anything to the contrary. Are you imaging to strawmen to create a debate? If so; why?

Quote:

I suggest a champion or standard bearer role for Jake in this matter.

This I disagree with. Not out of any depreciation for what he did but for his admitted motivations. He did it for himself. So I highly doubt he was seeking any glory or fawning for the chance to be seen as "a champion or standard bearer". I could be wrong but I don't believe I am.

It's funny that you would choose to reply to me here when I was asking a specific individual a question. It's really funny because you have chosen to not respond to the posts I have made specifically directed at you. Jake is more than capable of speaking for himself - are you?

LOL! Damn, Felix! I thought you and I might get together and so some of that fancy flag waving they do in the drum and bugle corps!

But I understand what you mean. When it comes to one's rights, you might well fall under the aegis of one group or another of like interest, and your efforts might assist them and theirs might assist you, but in the end, one works for one's own self preservation. Anything beyond that is gravy.

I spent 20 years in the military as an actitve Satanist, working for acceptance as a Satanist in the military and, after over 15 years of presenting my case while displaying professionalism as a military member, I was eventually recognized officially as a member of the Church of Satan and was the first man to receive his official dog tags with the religious denomination of Church of Satan.

Actually I opened this little door for all Satanists in 1969 right after I joined the Church that year:

1969 was the last year that the old Service Numbers, in my case OF114822 as a Regular Army officer, were included on dog tags. Thereafter they just included SSNs (which I have removed from this photo).

During 1970-75 several Satanists who were members of the various Armed Forces did the same. This engendered some dialogue between myself (as the Church's default military spokesPriest) and the various Chaplain branches.

The purpose of the religious ID on the dogtag is simple: If you are dead or near-dead, it tells the nearest chaplain [or stand-in] what to mumble over you. In the Church of Satan we didn't need any mumbling, so the "Satanist" was just to ensure than some Christian didn't accidentally say holy stuff over us and send us to Heaven by mistake.

There were several interim Army & DoD pamphlets & directives about not only Satanism but various other non-mainstream religions in the 1970+ period, culminating today in this DoD Directive, which is a good thing for any Satanist contemplating the military to print out and keep handy.

AF68093220... my old service number. I haven't even thought about that in decades. You and I both joined the military in the same year. My entry date was May 28th, By the time I finally got the OK for my dog tags, this number had long since gone the way of the dodos.

I'm pretty sure we were both in Vietnam at the same time. I was there in 1970 and reupped for a second tour in 1971. Spent the 1st tour at Cam Rahn Bay and the second at Tuy Hoa.

I specifically wanted Church of Satan because it's what I was... more than just Satanist... I wanted people to know and to consider. Now, being dead, it really wouldn't have mattered, because when we die, we just die. But if you GOTTA die, I figured, die cool and take as many with you as you could.

AF68093220... my old service number. I haven't even thought about that in decades. You and I both joined the military in the same year. My entry date was May 28th.

I "technically" joined the Army in 1966, since all "Upper Divison" Sr. ROTC cadets were officially enlisted in the USAR. I was commissioned in the Regular Army on 6/14/68, and joind the C/S 4/8/69. Went to Vietnam 2 months later (all over III Corps in Special Ops), back to the World in June 70 and my III° ordination on 6/21/70. And etc.

Quote:

By the time I finally got the OK for my dog tags, this number had long since gone the way of the dodos.

I still have my dad's tags from WW2, which weren't as weenie as yours & mine because back then they still had that indent so that if you croaked, one of the tags could be jammed up between your front teeth to ID your corpse.

Quote:

I specifically wanted CHURCH OF SATAN because it's what I was... more than just Satanist... I wanted people to know and to consider.

By the 1980s there was probably a point to this. In 1969-75 the Church of Satan and Satanism were identical. [And we were very arrogant about that.]

Quote:

But if you GOTTA die, I figured, die cool and take as many with you as you could.

Sounds like a plan to me. Of course, I was originally commissioned as an Armor officer with a 1204 Cavalry MOS, so I was entitled to Fiddler's Green.